Disposed¶23

Perumal v. The Revenue Divisional Officer

Madras HC20 Apr 2026WP(MD)/11102/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court Madurai Bench | W.P.(MD)No.11102 of 2026 | Perumal v. Revenue Divisional Officer Cheranmahadevi & Lakshman, Subburaj, Ponnarasi | Hemant Chandangoudar J | 20.04.2026 | Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act 2007 S.23 order dated 22.09.2025 Mu.Mu.10059/2024/A3 | settlement deed 827/2021 SRO Moolakaraipatti | Article 226 writ | alternative remedy S.16 appeal before District Collector | disposed with four-week window; limitation not to bar appellate consideration | counsel: M.Jaisingh (petitioner), P.Subbaraj SGP (R1).

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under S.16 before the District Collector within four weeks; appellate authority directed to consider the appeal on merits without regard to limitation; no order as to costs. ¶23

Perumal Vs The Revenue Divisional Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner could maintain this writ petition under Article 226 against the first respondent's order of 22.09.2025 (Mu.Mu.10059/2024/A3) passed under S.23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, despite an available statutory appeal under S.16 before the District Collector that had not been exhausted.

¶22

Court's answer

An efficacious remedy of appeal is provided under Section 16 before the District Collector against the order passed by the first respondent under Section 23 of the Act; the petitioner approached this Court before exhausting that remedy.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The writ petition is disposed of preserving liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 16 of the Act within four weeks from receipt of a copy of the order.

¶23

Key takeaways

If the appeal is filed, the appellate authority/District Collector shall consider it on merits without going into the question of limitation.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) - Hemant Chandangoudar, J. - W.P.(MD)No.11102 of 2026, disposed 20.04.2026. Petitioner sought certiorarified mandamus to quash proceedings dated 22.09.2025 (Mu.Mu.10059/2024/A3) of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Cheranmahadevi, passed under S.23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007, and consequently to cancel Settlement Deed No. 827/2021, SRO Moolakaraipatti, in favour of the 3rd respondent. Held: an efficacious appeal lies under S.16 before the District Collector; the petition having been filed before exhausting that remedy, it was disposed of with liberty to appeal within four weeks, the appellate authority to decide on merits uninfluenced by limitation; no costs.

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶2

DATED: 20.04.2026

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

¶5

W.P.(MD)No.11102 of 2026

¶6

Perumal .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs. -

¶8

The Revenue Divisional Officer, Cheranmahadevi, Thirunelveli.

¶9

Lakshman

¶10

Subburaj

¶11

Ponnarasi .. Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,

¶13

praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records related to impugned proceedings dated 22.09.2025 passed by the 1st respondent in Mu.Mu.10059/2024/A3 and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to cancel the settlement deed No.

¶14

827/2021, SRO Moolakaraipatti in favour of 3rd respondent.

¶15

1/4

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jaisingh

¶18

For Respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj Special Government Pleader for R1

¶19

ORDER

¶20

Mr.P.Subbaraj, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for

¶21

the first respondent.

¶22

2.The petitioner assails the order dated 22.09.2025 passed by the first respondent in exercise of power under Section 23 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. Against the said order, an efficacious remedy of appeal is provided under Section 16 before the District Collector. Before exhausting the said appeal remedy, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.

¶23

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of preserving liberty to

¶24

the petitioner to file an appeal under Section 16 of the Act within a period

¶25

of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶26

2/4

¶27

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

If such an application is filed, the appellate authority/District Collector shall consider the same on merits without going to the question of limitation.

¶29